All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2
-
Thought this analysis wasn't bad. May explain Ioane's non-selection: http://www.theroar.com.au/2017/07/05/the-centres-of-conundrum-at-eden-park/
-
@pakman said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
Thought this analysis wasn't bad. May explain Ioane's non-selection: http://www.theroar.com.au/2017/07/05/the-centres-of-conundrum-at-eden-park/
The analysis wasn't really on Ioane though - and the point they highlight against him is when he was faced with a 2 on 1 after being part of a 5 on 2 - not sure if that is good dropping evidence.
-
@pakman said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
Thought this analysis wasn't bad. May explain Ioane's non-selection: http://www.theroar.com.au/2017/07/05/the-centres-of-conundrum-at-eden-park/
It's particularly galling seeing the opportunities they squandered despite playing a man down. That would be the honest assessment players and coaches were talking about the days after.
-
Interesting in this game that twice cross kicks were put into the Lions in-goal, but both times there was no AB winger chasing, instead it was Kieran Read. Once he was easily outpaced by Daly, the other the ball won the race to go touch in goal.
Not interested in detailed analysis, just one of those things.
Not seen a successful kick pass or cross kick for al sit 2 months now. Since Beauden v Stormers.
-
there were some questions about when the SOB decision would be made public.
-
@taniwharugby What's the gist?
-
When using your forearm to smack someone in the head, don't pull your arm back in a windup motion, make it difficult to determine if you've clenched your fist and hope the player whose head you wack changes position slightly.
-
@Tim I didn't read it, I just found it when I read this, headline a little misleading.
-
So the decision was that it was not intentional or reckless, but accidental. IANAL but I fail to see the difference between accidental and reckless. It's not as if Naholo's head was changing position much during the tackle. If there is a chance you may hit his head with your swinging arm, to me that is reckless whether it is accidental or not.
On one hand, I am glad to see him cleared so there are no excuses when the AB's stuff them at Eden Park on Saturday.
On the other hand, this doesn't help their crusade to prevent head injuries if contact like that is OK if "accidental".
-
@Stockcar86 Well, the Naholo duck, which I don't recall, saved SOB. But I must say he puts extraordinary force into his ruck joining. If he'd been trying to hurt Naholo he could have died.
-
@Stockcar86 yeah that's the thing isn't it, we have seen plenty of accidental contacts with the head punished this year, so it does seem to fly in the face of their claims to be protecting players heads, accidental, reckless, careless, whatever, they are saying the onus is on the player to be aware of where his shoulder, hand, fist, arm is going to hit...
That said, I am ok with him being cleared, just the inconsistent messages and poor processes that stink.
-
I'm surprised that people don't see the difference between accidental and reckless. This is what the WR website says:
Reckless tackle A player is deemed to have made reckless contact during a tackle or attempted tackle or during other phases of the game if in making contact, the player knew or should have known that there was a risk of making contact with the head of an opponent, but did so anyway. This sanction applies even if the tackle starts below the line of the shoulders. This type of contact also applies to grabbing and rolling or twisting around the head/neck area even if the contact starts below the line of the shoulders. Minimum sanction: Yellow card Maximum sanction: Red card Accidental tackle When making contact with another player during a tackle or attempted tackle or during other phases of the game, if a player makes accidental contact with an opponent's head, either directly or where the contact starts below the line of the shoulders, the player may still be sanctioned. This includes situations where the ball-carrier slips into the tackle. Minimum sanction: PenaltyThe difference is in the "the player knew or should have known that there was a risk of making contact with the head of an opponent, but did so anyway."
This what the decision says on this point:
-
-
@Nepia said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
That is funny - it's basically saying it's Naholo's fault.
Nah, basically it is saying it was an accident. These things that sometimes happen.
-
@Catogrande said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
@Nepia said in All Blacks v BI Lions Test #2:
That is funny - it's basically saying it's Naholo's fault.
Nah, basically it is saying it was an accident. These things that sometimes happen.
Yep - saying exactly the same thing that most people here were saying about Sam Cane in Dublin last year.
-
On the SBW incident , havent watched the replay,
but i seem to recall the lions had the ball as a result of a nothing SBW grubber, I think his tackle was a couple of phases later,
im guessing his mindset at the time was one frustration at his ineffectual kick , and he was trying to make up for it with a display of dominance , and got it all wrong
